J>BuZ  -fie 


Northwestern  University  Law  School 

(UNION  COLLEGE  OF  LAW) 

I 

Endowment  and  Building  Fund 
1919-1920 


ihe  UBRWW  of  toe 
W1AR  1  o  1939 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

NORTHWESTERN  UNIVERSITY 
LAW  SCHOOL 

(Union  College  of  Law) 

Endowment  and  Building  Fund 

RESOLUTION  ADOPTED  BY  THE  ALUMNI  ADVISORY  COMMITTEE 

1.  The  veteran  School  to  which  we  owe  our  start  in  the  legal 
profession  has  reached  a  point  of  usefulness  and  high 
repute  which  marks  it  as  one  of  the  solid  institutions  of  the 
country,  radiating  its  powerful  influence  from  this  com¬ 
munity  in  all  directions  throughout  the  Nation.  We  are 
justly  proud  of  it.  As  a  vital  center  of  progressive  ideas  it 
stands  second  to  none.  But  the  perpetuity  of  this  charac¬ 
ter  must  be  guaranteed,  beyond  the  fluctuating  contingen¬ 
cies  of  annual  tuition  fees.  Its  work  must  be  freed  from 
the  incubus  of  the  annual  deficit,  which  now  makes  the 
continuance  of  the  School  activities  dependent  upon  such 
largess  as  can  be  spared  each  year  from  the  general  over¬ 
head  income  of  the  University.  And  the  plans  which  its 
able  Faculty  have  matured  for  enlarged  service  to  the 
profession  and  the  community  must  be  supplied  with 
ample  means  for  that  fruition  which  is  in  present  condi¬ 
tions  wholly  impracticable. 

2.  The  time  has  now  arrived  when  this  perpetual  guarantee 
must  be  established  for  the  continuation  of  the  Law 
School’s  multifold  beneficent  activities, — and  this  in  the 
interest  not  merely  of  the  University,  but  of  the  commun¬ 
ity,  the  State,  and  the  Nation. 


3.  This  perpetuity  can  only  be  effected  by  obtaining  for  the 
School 

(a)  A  sum  of  money  which  will  give  it  a  permanent 
fire  proof  building  of  its  own,  to  house  safely  its  invaluable 
library,  and  to  afford  space  for  its  necessary  work. 

(b)  An  endowment  fund  which  by  the  income  will 
support  the  numerous  activities — the  fruition  of  all  its 
recent  ideas  and  inventions — necessary  for  contributing  its 
part  to  the  professional  and  social  welfare  of  the  com¬ 
munity. 

These  activities  include  (a)  a  laboratory  of  applied 
criminal  science,  (b)  a  bureau  of  legislative  research,  (c) 
a  legal  hospital  clinic,  (d)  a  department  of  comparative 
law  (including  Latin- American  Law),  (e)  the  mainten¬ 
ance  of  the  twoi  professional  journals  edited  from  the 
School,  (f)  a  department  of  law  office  co-operation  (analo¬ 
gous  to  the  forward  movement  in  engineering  education), 
and  (g)  a  few  additional  measures  already  well  tested  and 
fully  planned,  but  impracticable  without  some  additional 
expense.  The  establishment  of  chairs  for  the  above 
activities  is  needed. 

The  Law  School’s  requirements  for  its  degree  are  now 
exceeded  by  none,  and  equalled  by  only  a  few,  of  Ameri¬ 
can  law  schools.  Hence,  an  additional  reason  for  worthily 
fulfilling  the  foregoing  purposes. 

4.  For  the  first  of  these  purposes,  a  sum  of  $500,000  is  the 
minimum  (to  cover  land,  building,  and  maintenance). 

For  the  second,  the  income  of  $1,000,000  is  the  mini¬ 


mum. 


5.  Therefore,  Be  It  Resolved ,  That  we  heartily  commend  the 
plan  to  raise  the  combined  sum  by  June  1,  1920. 

(Signed) 


Thomas  M.  Hoyne,  ’66 
Frank  J.  Loesch,  74 
Frank  H.  Scott,  78 
Edgar  B.  Tolman,  ’82 
Sigmund  Zeisler,  ’84 
Will  H.  Clark,  ’85 
Frank  O.  Lowden,  ’87 
Otto  R.  Barnett,  ’88 
Chancellor  Jenks,  ’88 
Lessing  Rosenthal,  ’91 
Mitchell  D.  Follansbee,  ’93 
George  A.  Mason,  ’94 
Frederick  P.  Vose,  ’94 
Hubert  E.  Page,  ’95 
Carl  R.  Latham,  ' 95 
Charles  M.  Foell,  ’96 
Roswell  B.  Mason,  ’97 
Henry  C.  Hall,  ’97 
Charles  A.  Koepke,  ’99 

Chicago,  June,  1919 


Charles  B.  Elder,  ’99 
Chas.  Lederer,  ’01 
Charles  M.  Thomson,  ’02 
Abel  Davis,  ’02 
Hayes  McKinney,  ’03 
Thomas  G.  Deering,  ’03 
Walter  H.  Jacobs,  ’04 
F.  Harold  Smith,  ’05 
Frederic  Burnham,  ’05 
Chas.  O.  Rundall,  ’06 
Morton  H.  Eddy,  ’06 
Roy  W.  Hill,  ’07 
Orville  J.  Taylor,  ’08 
Lewis  F.  Jacobson,  ’08 
Ralph  R.  Hawxhurst,  ’09 
Melvin  M.  Hawley,  ’09 
Theodore  Schmidt,  ’09 
Ernest  Palmer,  ’10 
Chas.  J.  Wendland,  ’10 


Oscar  D.  Stern,  ’10 
J.  Ralph  Tascher,  ’1 1 
George  D.  Smith,  ’1 1 
Fred  Thulin,  ’12 
Ira  E.  Westbrook,  ’12 
Perry  Patterson,  ’13 
Raymond  Waite,  ’13 
Ralph  R.  Obenchain,  ’14 
Homer  H.  Cooper,  ’14 
Arthur  W.  Nelson,  ’14 


J.  Wallace  Thomson,  ’14 
Junius  C.  Scofield,  ’15 
Ralph  D.  Shanesy,  ’15 
Robert  McCormick  Adams,  ’16 
Edward  N.  Maher,  ’16 
Allen  E.  Denton,  ’16 
George  H.  Grear,  ’16 
Roy  M.  McKerchar,  ’16 
Paul  E.  Price,  ’17 
Omar  P.  Stelle,  ’17 


Northwestern  University  Building 
Chicago,  June,  1919 

My  Dear  Hubbard: 

You  inquire  why  the  Law  School  is  now  asking  for  this  Million-and-a- 
Half  fund.  I  will  tell  you. 

It  is  simply  because  the  time  has  come,  both  for  the  school  and  for  the 
community  and  the  Nation,  when  the  work  to  be  done  needs  that  sum.  It  is 
the  right  and  necessary  thing  for  us  to  do  the  work ;  the  community  also 
expects  it ;  without  the  funds  the  work  cannot  be  done ;  and  we  have  every 
confidence,  therefore,  that  the  friends  of  the  School  will  obtain  it,  and  will 
thus  fulfill  our  destiny  for  us. 

But  why,  you  ask,  must  it  be  a  Million-and-a-Half  ?  Simply  because 
that  is  the  least  sum  that  will  do  the  work. 

Let  me  specify. 

1.  In  the  first  place,  the  building.  The  Library  is  under  daily  risk 
of  a  destructive  fire,  in  an  old  building,  located  amidst  the  most  combustible 
surroundings.  Every  year,  for  ten  years  past,  up  and  down  Lake  Street,  in 
our  vicinity,  one  or  two  ancient  buildings  have  been  gutted  by  fire.  Bv  good 
luck  we  have  escaped,  so  far.  A  conflagration  would  destroy  all  the  work 
of  the  last  twelve  years  in  building  up  the  most  unique  Law  Library  in  this 
country,  outside  of  Harvard  University  and  Congress.  No  one  other  law 
library,  I  think,  has  served  and  is  serving  so  fruitfully  to  promote  legal  re¬ 
search.  Much  of  its  treasure  would  be  irreparably  gone, — drawn  as  it  is 
from  unique  collections  that  have  come  on  the  market,  and  from  constant 
delving  for  thousands  of  special  titles  here  and  there.  To  allow  it  to  remain 
longer  as  defenseless  as  it  is,  would  be  excusable  only  on  the  supposition  that 
we  have  asked,  and  our  friends  have  been  unable  to  give,  the  necessary  pro¬ 
tection.  And  that  is  what  justifies  our  asking  now. 

Then,  again,  in  mere  quantity  of  books,  it  is  too  great  for  the  present 
space.  We  have  filled  with  its  books  all  the  corridors,  the  professors’  rooms 
and  Booth  Hall;  we  have  stored  books  in  the  basement,  and  almost  every¬ 
where  else, — except  the  fire-escapes.  And  yet  the  shelves  are  bursting  with 
books,  and  the  last  yard  of  space  has  been  found.  So  that  here  alone  would 
be  plenty  of  reason  for  seeking  a  new  home  for  the  Library,  even  if  there 
were  not  pressing  need  for  fire-protection. 


Besides  this,  our  other  activities  are  cramped  for  space,  and  are  (literally) 
pushed  to  the  wall.  With  six  resident  members  of  the  faculty,  two  journals 
of  legal  science  edited  in  our  quarters,  crowded  study-rooms,  and  library 
tables,  we  are  everywhere  in  need  of  twice  the  space. 

A  new  building  is  the  only  solution. 

2.  And  in  the  next  place,  our  work. 

Now  here  I  must  ask  you  to  step  back  and  look  at  the  situation  in  a 
large  perspective. 

The  Law  has  grown  rapidly  in  the  last  twenty-five  years, — like  a  youth 
with  his  old  suit.  Or,  rather,  the  community  and  its  legal  affairs  have  grown, 
and  the  Law  is  the  old  suit. 

But  before  we  go  too  far  with  that  metaphor,  let  me  put  it  this  way: 
The  Law  is  a  social  science;  everybody  is  now  beginning  to  realize' that. 
It  means  that  Law  has  to  be  tested,  like  other  applied  sciences,  by  what  it 
can  do  for  the  community.  Law  is  not  simply  a  dogma,  coming  to  us  by 
some  divine  or  imperial  fiat.  Law  is  a  tool.  And  so  the  natural  test  which 
we  are  entitled  to  put  it  to,  from  time  to  time,  is,  Does  it  work?  And  the 
meaning  of  the  great  ferment,  increasing  of  late  years,  and  in  almost  all  parts 
of  the  law  and  the  community,  is  simply  that  this  is  one  of  the  long  periods, 
which  come  every  so  often,  when  the  issue  is  being  raised,  for  Law,  all  along 
the  line,  does  it  work? 

Now  mostly  it  does  work.  To  suppose  that  all  or  most  of  the  Law  is  at 
fault  and  needs  to  be  changed  is  absurd.  But  the  difficulty  is  that  the  com¬ 
munity  does  not  know  in  advance,  and  the  profession  does  not  know,  what 
are  the  particular  parts  that  might  need  change.  And  so  the  issue  is  capable 
of  being  raised  all  along  the  line.  And  therefore,  we,  the  profession,  have  to 
be  ready  all  along  the  line,  to  defend,  if  need  be,  and  therefore  to  inquire 
for  the  purpose  of  defending,  or  criticizing,  if  need  be.  We  must  study  more 
of  the  philosophy  of  the  Law,  and  we  must  study  more  of  the  practical 
operation  of  the  different  parts  of  the  Law.  We  must,  in  short,  be  able  to 
give  a  reason  for  the  faith  that  is  in  us,  to  forestall  the  quacks,  the  fanatics, 
and  the  demagogues,  and  to  lead  in  adequate  reconstruction  at  necessary 
points.  All  this  signifies  a  new  outlook  and  enlarged  and  improved  methods 
in  legal  education  and  research. 

The  truth  is  that  the  next  two  generations  are  going  to  be  marked  by 
many  new  methods  and  new  activities  in  legal  research.  And  the  University 


Law  Schools  must  take  the  lead  in  guiding  this,  so  that  the  now  beginning 
lawyers  may  be  ready  in  their  day  of  power.  Our  own  Law  School  is  par¬ 
ticularly  fitted,  both  by  its  traditions,  its  personnel,  and  its  location,  to  under¬ 
take  to  meet  these  new  needs.  It  has  indeed  already  undertaken  to  do  so ; 
but  further  progress  is  impossible  until  adequate  funds  are  provided.  That 
is  why  it  is  calling  attention  to  the  need  now. 

Just  to  show  you  that  our  plans  are  concrete  and  useful,  and  not  merely 
vague  abstractions,  I  will  mention  some  of  them : 

(1)  The  modern  problems  of  Commercial,  Industrial,  and  Corpora¬ 
tion  Law  now  looming  so  large  (business  combinations,  public  utilities,  com¬ 
mission  administration  of  commerce,  labor  legislation,  etc.)  have  received 
as  yet  little  or  no  recognition  in  the  orthodox  curriculum.  A  new  chair  must 
be  created  to  deal  with  them. 

(2)  The  entire  range  of  problems  of  Contemporary  Legislation  calls 
for  a  vast  amount  of  patient  research,  which  only  a  University  Law  School  is 
qualified  to  undertake  impartially.  A  chair  must  be  provided  to  organize 
the  work  of  graduate  and  special  students,  and  to  set  proper  standards  of 
method.  As  an  example  of  the  work  which  the  University  Law  Schools 
ought  long  ago  to  have  been  initiating,  I  mention  the  admirable  work  of  the 
American  Judicature  Society  in  drafting  model  acts  for  judicial  organization 
and  civil  procedure.  In  France,  the  professors  of  the  University  of  Paris 
have  organized  a  corps  of  legislative  studies  for  the  renovation  of  their 
century-old  Code;  and  this  leadership  by  the  universities  is  the  natural  method 
for  our  own  democratic  country.  Only  thus  can  the  innumerable  proposals 
of  reform  be  scientifically  guided  and  be  kept  out  of  the  control  of  sciolists 
and  faddists. 

(3)  A  laboratory  cf  Applied  Criminal  Science  must  be  established. 
The  problem  of  crime,  now  more  urgently  than  ever,  calls  for  the  coordination 
of  several  branches  of  knowledge.  Experts  from  the  fields  of  law,  psychology, 
medicine,  police,  prisons,  and  sociology,  must  be  brought  together  and  their 
work  organized  in  continuous  research  under  university  direction.  I  want 
to  see  a  bureau  of  practical  research  where  every  young  man  would  naturally 
think  of  coming  who  aspired  to  be  a  prosecuting  attorney,  or  was  one  already, 
and  desired  to  be  well  grounded  in  modern  principles  and  methods.  We 
have  ample  personnel  available;  and  the  part  taken  by  our  School,  in  1909, 
on  its  Fiftieth  Anniversary,  in  founding  the  American  Institute  of  Criminal 
Law  and  Criminology,  justifies  our  undertaking  this  leadership  in  the  future. 


(4)  In  the  practice  of  law,  the  Clinic  for  graduate  students  is  now 
necessary,  in  law  as  in  medicine.  By  combining  the  charitable  methods  of 
the  Legal  Aid  Societies  with  the  system  of  the  Law  Schools,  two  needs  would 
he  served,  and  in  the  best  possible  manner.  The  Bar  Examiners  and  the 
American  Bar  Association  Committee  have  long  favored  a  fourth  year  for 
practice  training;  and  a  fourth  year  ol  charitable  legal  practice,  under  the 
management  of  a  professor  of  practice,  will  fit  the  best  graduates  for  practice 
in  the  most  efficient  way.  A  committee  of  the  Chicago  Bar  Association  has 
recently  recommended  precisely  this  method.  Beginnings  have  been  made 
already  in  a  few  law  schools;  our  own  was  the  first.  But  until  it  can  be 
put  on  a  graduate  basis,  no  real  progress  is  possible.  For  this  purpose  a  new 
chair  is  needed.  No  more  important  advance  than  this  can  be  named  for 
American  legal  education  and  American  justice. 

(5)  A  chair  of  Comparative  Law  must  be  established.  In  these  days 
of  extensive  commercial  intercourse  with  Latin-America,  of  financial  rela¬ 
tions  with  all  of  Europe  and  of  some  sort  of  world  tribunal  in  prospect,  a 
pressure  is  found  everywhere  to  know  what  the  laws  of  these  foreign  coun¬ 
tries  are.  We  possess  abundant  library  resources  for  such  studies;  and  our 
Gary  Library’s  initial  step  of  providing  materials  has  been  followed,  in  some 
degree,  by  a  dozen  law  libraries  East  and  West.  But  we  have  no  chair  for 
instruction  and  research  in  those  subjects.  Young  men  are  waiting  to  be 
trained  in  that  field.  The  German  colonial  commerce  departments  at  Berlin 
and  Vienna  long  ago  had  schools  in  which  foreign  law  could  be  studied.  We 
must  prepare  in  the  same  way. 

(6)  The  various  branches  of  instruction  in  Jurisprudence ,  Legal  His¬ 
tory,  and  Philosophy  of  Law,  must  be  enlarged.  Most  persons,  I  think,  do 
not  realize  that  no  judicious  and  substantial  progress  in  law  is  possible  with¬ 
out  first  studying  both  the  history  and  the  philosophy  of  the  subject.  There 
is  an  ever  increasing  demand  for  these  by  graduate  students;  and  at  least 
one  additional  chair  is  indispensable.  Our  country  and  our  profession  have 
hitherto  almost  wholly  lacked  this  group  of  studies.  Its  lack  in  American 
university  law  schools  was  the  chief  subject  of  criticism  in  the  Continental 
Professor  Redlich’s  recent  report  to  the  Carnegie  Foundation  on  American 
Legal  Education.  For  the  constructive  legal  thinking  of  the  next  two  gen¬ 
erations,  a  basis  must  be  laid  in  the  law  school  work  with  the  young  men 
of  today. 


7.  The  field  of  International  Law  will  now  require  expansion,  in  the 
researches  and  instruction  of  law  schools.  In  the  first  place,  the  intricate  task 
of  re-casting  the  traditional  rules  for  war  and  peace  demands  new  constructive 
thinking.  In  the  next  place,  the  League  of  Nations  idea,  as  an  embryo  form 
of  international  government,  will  henceforth  occupy  a  new  place  on  the  stage; 
in  fact,  this  Law  School  is  already  offering  the  first  course  of  its  kind  in  any 
American  law  school,  entitled  “International  Constitutional  Law  (League  of 
Nations) .” 

These  concrete  plans,  my  dear  Hubbard  (and  others  could  be  men¬ 
tioned),  must  convince  you  that  what  we  are  aspiring  to  undertake,  in  our 
expansion  of  work,  is  not  a  mere  polite  academic  abstraction,  but  a  real  and 
needed  contribution  to  the  urgent  demands  of  today , — a  constructive  service, 
both  scientific  and  practical. 

And  let  me  ask  you,  just  here,  if  I  have  made  it  clear  that  we  are  not 
regarding  this  enterprise  in  the  fervent,  excited  spirit  of  “reformers.”  That 
is  not  our  label  at  all.  We  are  scientists ;  and  we  stick  to  the  cold  solid  facts 
of  legal  science.  But  we  do  maintain  that  Law  is  a  practical  science ;  that  it 
has  to  be  constantly  studying  its  own  relation  to  the  community’s  needs;  and 
that  a  university  body  of  experts  in  legal  science  must  be  constantly  occupied 
with  that  study,  pursuing  new  methods  of  research  for  new  needs. 

Law  renders  just  as  real  and  beneficent  a  service  to  the  community  as 
medicine;  and  for  the  work  now  facing  it  in  the  next  two  generations,  it  will 
require  endowed  university  funds,  much  more  than  any  other  department  of 
research  or  education ;  and  the  sjnnpathy  which  should  be  felt  for  those  re¬ 
quirements  is  quite  as  great  in  the  one  case  as  in  the  other.  A  man  who 
contributes  to  an  endowed  fund  for  university  legal  research  is  helping  the 
country, — helping  to  relieve  the  miseries  and  to  advance  the  prosperities  of 
his  fellows — just  as  much  as  by  any  other  sacrifice  he  makes. 

And  an  additional  reason  for  believing  that  our  School  is  worthy  of  this 
support  is  that  it  now  requires,  both  for  its  four-year  course  of  law  studies 
and  for  entrance  upon  that  course,  a  standard  of  attainment  exceeded  by  no 
other  School  and  equalled  only  by  a  few.  The  resources  now  asked  for  are 
needed  to  enable  it  to  maintain  that  standard  and  that  leadership. 

And  this  is  why  we  solicit  your  co-operation  to  enable  the  School  to 
fulfill  the  important  task  that  is  now  pointed  out  by  its  traditions,  its  aspira¬ 
tions,  and  its  duty  to  this  community,  to  the  profession,  and  to  the  Nation. 

Yours  faithfully, 

John  H.  Wigmore. 


I  Iram  nnq 


NORTHWESTERN  UNIVERSITY  LAW  SCHOOL 

(UNION  COLLEGE  OF  LAW) 

ENDOWMENT  AND  BUILDING  FUND  1919-20 


THE  NATIONAL  FUTURE  OF  THE  LAW  SCHOOL 

i  ******  And  now  Mr.  President,  may  I  speak  about 
the  Law  School. 

A  new  era  is  at  hand.  Dr.  Hough  has  assumed  the  presi¬ 
dency  of  the  University.  September  will  see  our  staff  re¬ 
stored,  by  the  return  of  the  two  members  who  were  absent 
in  the  military  service,  and  by  the  addition  of  a  new  member 
to  fill  the  place  left  by  our  lamented  colleague  Schofield. 

Changing  conditions  confront  the  University  and  the  Law 
School,  as  well  as  the  country  at  large,  and  Chicago.  They 
seem  to  unite  in  raising  this  question,  which  I  have  been 
pondering  of  late: 

Is  there  an  opportunity  for  a  law  school  located  at 
Chicago,  as  our  own  is  and  always  has  been,  to  render  a 
distinctive  service  to  the  Nation?  Is  it  possible  for  North¬ 
western  University  Law  School  (the  old  Union  College 
of  Law,  founded  in  1859),  to  become  in  some  respects  the 
most  generally  useful,  and,  therefore,  the  most  beneficial, 
institution  of  its  kind  in  our  land? 

The  question  merits  consideration. 

I  would  not  prophesy;  but  I  should  like  to  call  atten¬ 
tion  to  some  aspects  of  the  opportunity  that  may  be  at 
hand. 

An  Easterner,  ignorant  of  the  Western  spirit,  and  of 
the  traditions  of  this  School  and  this  University,  would 
smile  at  the  audacity  of  the  ambition  to  make  this  city  of 

(1).  From  a  speech  delivered  by  Professor  CHARLES  CHENEY  HYDE,  at  the  Annual 
Banquet  of  the  Alumni  Association,  in  Chicago,  June  16,  1919. 


ours  the  National  center  of  any  intellectual  activity.  And 
he  would  hesitate  long  before  sending  his  son  West,  to  ex¬ 
periment  with  what  was  being  done  here.  A  reason  for  his 
reluctance  would  be  the  remoteness  of  Chicago  from  the 
Atlantic  seaboard,  and  its  inability  to  enjoy  visual  and 
physical  contacts  with  European  life  and  trade.  He  would 
not  believe  that  any  university  in  a  city  so  situated  could 
really  feel  the  pulse  of  the  outside  world  and  understand 
its  highest  aspirations  and  most  powerful  impulses. 

This  suggests  one  hard  condition  which  a  law  school 
here  would  have  to  meet  well,  in  order  to  enjoy  national 
preeminence.  It  would  need  to  be  as  closely  in  touch  with 
the  legal  or  juridical  thought  of  the  outside  world,  espe¬ 
cially  European  and  Latin-American,  as  if  it  were  located 
in  Boston  or  New  York;  and  it  would  need  to  be  even 
closer  in  touch,  because  of  its  habitat  in  an  inland  city. 

To  overcome  real  prejudices  (of  which  the  possessors 
are  doubtless  oftentimes  unconscious)  against  even  our  own 
central  part  of  the  West,  there  is  required  a  definite  unity 
of  effort,  productive  not  only  of  individual  work  of  the 
highest  order,  but  also  of  constructive  plans  of  great  national 
worth,  and  which  have  not  been  devised  and  put  into  opera¬ 
tion  elsewhere.  From  Washington  to  Bangor  there  is  still 
the  belief  that  in  matters  of  science  and  art  (as  distinct 
from  trade)  the  soundest  views  and  the  surest  progress  are 
rarely  to  be  found  beyond  the  reach  of  the  Atlantic’s  tide. 
But  the  error  of  such  a  conclusion  would  be  frankly  ad¬ 
mitted,  if  its  falsity  were  proven  to  those  who  hold  it. 

There  are  to-day,  in  other  fields,  significant  tokens  of 
the  ambitions  and  possibilities  of  Chicago.  In  spite  of  the 
existing  advantages  enjoyed  by  New  York,  an  important 
bank  here  is  advertising  in  the  current  magazines  the  effort 
to  make  Chicago  the  fiscal  center  of  the  international  trade 
of  the  United  States.  As  you  know,  the  cities  of  the  Missis¬ 
sippi  Valley  are  linking  themselves  together  in  an  association 


to  transform  that  valley,  from  Lake  Michigan  to  the  Gulf, 
into  a  vast  artery  of  foreign  and  domestic  commerce.  In 
other  respects  also,  our  horizon  is  not  bounded  by  what  is 
known  as  the  Central  West.  We  have  made  peoples  of 
remote  lands  buy  our  beef.  We  have  sold  harvesting  ma¬ 
chinery  and  typewriters  in  the  Orient.  We  have  caused  the 
enlightened  parents  of  Oregon  to  order  baby-carriages  by 
mail  from  a  Chicago  Avenue  concern.  In  matters  of  base¬ 
ball  we  have  always  aspired  to  national  fame,  and  have 
even  experienced  grief  when  Chicago  failed  to  produce  a 
team  of  world  champions. 

Are  we  then  as  lawyers  less  ambitious  locally,  in  what 
pertains  to  legal  training?  Are  we  content  (I  ask  it  most 
seriously)  to  permit  this  Law  School  to  drift  into  a  minor 
league,  as  it  were,  and  merely  hold  its  own  among  local 
rivals? 

Happily  it  is  not  to-day  in  such  straits.  But  if  we  are 
courageous  enough  to  observe  comparisons,  which  we  are 
bound  to  make  with  certain  Eastern  schools  in  the  next 
few  years,  we  must  acknowledge  that  the  fulfilment  of 
really  national  aspirations  by  Northwestern  University  Law 
School  involves  something  more  tangible  and  exacting  than 
mere  academic  dreams.  We  shall  be  outdistanced,  if  not 
relegated  permanently  to  a  place  of  secondary  rank,  un¬ 
less  we  take  heroic  steps  and  at  once  make  a  titanic  effort 
to  offer  to  the  students  of  the  United  States  some  distinctive 
contributions  of  singular  value  and  usefulness. 

If  an  idea  is  sound,  and  is  freshly  applied  for  the  com¬ 
mon  good,  the  place  where  it  is  developed  is,  of  course,  rel¬ 
atively  unimportant.  Hull  House  has  made  as  strong  an 
impression  on  the  world  as  if  it  had  been  located  on  the 
Bowery,  instead  of  on  Halsted  Street.  The  Mayo  brothers 
did  not  need  to  go  to  New  England  in  order  to  make  effective 
their  surgical  ministrations. 


If  it  be  assumed  that  Chicago  is  not  incapable  of  pos¬ 
sessing  the  foremost  American  law  school,  what  can  we  here 
offer  of  such  special  excellence  and  positive  value  that  stu¬ 
dents  will  flock  to  us  from  every  corner  of  the  Union?  “He 
that  would  bring  home  with  him  the  wealth  of  the  Indies, 
must  carry  the  wealth  of  the  Indies  with  him.” 

Well,  we  have  a  great  idea,  in  the  first  place,  and  we 
have  also  the  men  to  interpret  it. 

Hitherto,  the  best  American  law  schools  have  generally 
been  content  to  teach  embryo  lawyers  how  to  think  legally, 
and  thereby  fit  them  for  private  practice.  There  has  been 
little  effort  to  do  more.  Nor  has  there  been  concern  about 
the  function  which  students  should  undertake  to  fulfil  as 
lawyers,  nor  about  their  relationship  as  such  to  the  State. 

In  our  own  School,  however,  by  its  recent  action  in 
lengthening  the  course  and  broadening  the  curriculum,  a 
somewhat  different  stand  has  been  taken.  The  School  is 
now  capable  of  becoming  a  powerful  agency  for  promoting 
also  the  public  welfare  of  the  community. 

This  capacity  fits  well  with  the  spirit  of  the  times  that 
are  upon  us.  As  an  apparent  consequence  of  the  war,  men 
and  women,  returning  from  military  or  civil  service,  feel 
and  declare  that  no  occupation,  however  lucrative,  seems  to 
be  worth  while,  unless  it  has  also  some  tangible  connection 
with  the  welfare  of  the  State.  There  seems  to  be  no  zeal 
for  work  which  is  solely  for  the  personal  or  private  gain  of 
the  worker,  whether  he  be  a  banker  or  an  elevator-man  or 
a  lawyer.  This  condition  has  given  rise  to  the  idea  that  the 
chief  function  of  a  really  great  law  school  is  to  train  men 
to  be  capable  of  rendering  primarily  some  public  legal 
service,  whether  for  the  City  or  the  State  or  the  Nation,  and 
to  inspire  them  to  be  content  with  nothing  less. 

There  should,  of  course,  be  no  design  to  turn  out  men 
less  fitted  for  normal  practice  at  the  bar,  or  less  ambitious 


for  success  there.  But  it  is  believed  to  be  vitally  important 
that  they  should  early  realize  that  a  career  in  law  only  par¬ 
tially  justifies  itself  unless  it  both  fits  and  leads  the  practi¬ 
tioner  to  be  of  direct  public  use.  Knowledge  of  the  law  and 
technical  skill  in  its  application  make  the  possessor  a  trustee 
for  the  public  good.  Very  many  of  you  here  have  known  the 
joy  that  comes  from  faithful  performance  of  that  trust.  After 
such  an  experience,  you  would  surely  regret  to  see  your 
Alma  Mater  fail  to  inspire  younger  classes  with  zeal  to 
render  similar  public  legal  service. 

I  doubt  whether  the  alumni  of  any  law  school  in  this 
country  have  yet  met,  in  an  assembly  such  as  this,  with  a 
definite  resolve  that  their  school  be  dedicated  to  work  pri¬ 
marily  for  the  public  good.  The  alumni  who  do  so  resolve 
will  have  taken  the  initial  step  to  give  their  School  a  solid 
qualification  for  national  esteem.  Suppose  our  Law  School 
should  solemnly  adopt  as  its  motto,  “FOR  THE  PUBLIC 
GOOD”? 

We  find  the  public  need  in  the  United  States  to-day  ap¬ 
pallingly  complex  and  exacting.  It  is  municipal,  and  yet 
also  nation-wide.  It  demands  men  who  will  take  the  time 
to  study  oatiently  legal  history,  administrative  law,  legal 
philosophy,  comparative  law,  criminology,  colonial  law,  and 
the  laws  of  modern  economic  problems.  It  calls  for  those 
who  can  render  practical  aid  in  contemporaneous  legislation. 
It  seeks  those  familiar  with  that  Roman  Civil  law  and  which 
prevails  in  Continental  Europe  and  in  Latin-America.  There 
will  be  an  increasing  public  demand  for  men  proficient  in 
private  and  public  international  law.  These  demands  merely 
supplement  the  necessity  for  individuals  who  have  under¬ 
gone  a  thorough  training  in  the  law  of  contracts,  torts,  crimes, 
evidence,  property,  constitutional  law  and  equity.  Yet  it  is 
apparent  that  the  student  who  has  had  this  narrower  training 
still  has  far  to  go  before  he  is  fitted  to  respond  well  to  what 
the  State  calls  for  in  certain  fields. 


Again,  the  State  will  not  deem  of  greatest  value  even 
the  institution  offering  the  greatest  variety  of  courses,  unless 
instruction  in  each  be  of  the  highest  order  and  according  to 
the  soundest  methods.  Our  Law  School  will  gain  little 
ground  if  it  offers  courses  not  taught  by  the  strongest  men 
and  in  the  best  way.  In  order  to  ascertain  what  is  the  best 
way,  there  needs  to  be  searching  re-examination  of  what  are 
supposed  to  be  approved  methods.  To  gain  the  benefit  of 
sound  tests  it  seems  important  to  cut  loose  from  accepted 
academic  standards.  At  Northwestern  University  Law  School 
we  cherish  traditions  of  instruction  which  are  more  than 
cheering  memories.  After  the  days  of  the  late  James  B. 
Thayer,  no  man  in  America  gave  a  stronger  course  in  consti¬ 
tutional  law  than  did  our  own  beloved  Henry  Schofield. 
His  work  remains  an  inspiration  to  those  who  were  his  col¬ 
leagues  and  survive  to  follow  him. 

But  how  can  a  law  school  such  as  ours  respond  well  and 
with  notable  effectiveness  to  the  various  and  severe  demands 
of  the  State?  How  can  we  assure  a  student  who  attains  pro¬ 
ficiency  in  a  special  field  of  law  that  public  work  will  reward 
his  long  and  unremunerative  toil?  How  can  the  Law  School 
bring  together  the  State  and  the  men  and  women  trained  to 
serve  it  and  longing  to  do  so? 

I  believe  that  our  Faculty  now  finds  itself  preeminently 
fitted  for  the  task,  and  zealous,  moreover,  to  devote  itself 
to  its  fulfilment.  We  believe  that  among  us  are  found, 
in  various  shares  of  individual  contribution,  those  who  know 
what  the  public  interest  requires  and  now  to  respond  to  its 
every  need.  The  task  requires  familiarity  with  the  broad 
technical  problem;  knowledge  of  the  various  methods  by 
which  it  may  be  solved;  ability  to  establish  the  necessary 
organization;  and  skill  to  insure  symmetrical  development  of 
the  general  plan.  Most  of  all,  it  requires  a  passion  for  public 
justice,  and  a  longing  to  see  the  Law  School  dedicated  to  the 
service  of  the  State.  These  requirements,  I  firmly  believe, 
can  be  found  in  our  ranks. 


But  the  Faculty  can  do  little  if  left  to  themselves.  They 
may  rejoice  in  the  field  that  Chicago  offers  for  a  great  law 
school.  They  may  devote  their  lives  to  the  most  exhaustive 
research  and  to  the  best  teaching,  and  to  the  effort  to  inspire 
students  with  the  loftiest  aspirations;  and  may  yet  fail  to 
place  the  Law  School  where  it  ought  to  be.  Yale,  with  its 
school  of  jurisprudence;  Columbia,  with  its  widening  curric¬ 
ulum;  or  Harvard,  with  its  high  traditions;  may  still  render 
relatively  insignificant,  from  a  national  point  of  view,  what 
these  men  undertake  here. 

The  real  hope  of  Northwestern  University  Law  School 
is  the  Alumni.  It  lies  within  their  power,  and  within  that 
of  you  here  to-night,  to  determine  the  future  of  the  institu¬ 
tion.  You  represent  the  graduates  of  some  sixty  years  stand¬ 
ing.  No  law  school  near  us  can  turn  to  a  body  of  such  loyalty 
and  strength.  Your  power  is  sufficient,  and  your  voice  will 
be  decisive.  If  you  believe  that  this  institution  can  be  and 
ought  to  be  the  seat  of  the  first  law  school  in  America,  you 
can  give  to  it  that  distinction.  If  you  believe  that  such  a 
school  should,  above  all,  be  dedicated  to  public  service,  and 
are  determined  that  this  institution  shall  be  so  dedicated, 
you  can  make  it  possible  for  Northwestern  University  Law 
School  to  be  of  highest  usefulness  to  the  United  States. 

Your  determination  to  seize  the  opportunity  will  entail 
no  easy  burden.  Heavy  drafts  will  be  made  on  your  time 
and  thought.  Funds  will  have  to  be  raised  for  endowment 
and  buildings.  Doubtless  an  alumni  advisory  committee  will 
be  needed,  and  will  be  impressed  into  active  and  constant 
service. 

Nevertheless,  the  opportunity  is  yours.  It  has  seemed  to 
me  to  be  one  of  such  large  possibilities  and  withal  so  in¬ 
spiring,  that  I  have  had  the  greatest  satisfaction  in  coming 
from  Maine  expressly  to  attend  this  occasion  and  to  bring 
the  matter  to  your  attention. 

For  the  privilege  of  doing  so,  I  thank  you  heartily. 


NORTHWESTERN  UNIVERSITY  LAW  SCHOOL 

) 

(Union  College  of  Law) 

ENDOWMENT  AND  BUILDING  FUND  1919-20 


FOUNDATION  ENDOWMENT  PLAN 

Distribution  of  the  Endowment  Plan  Fund 
into  Foundations 

The  plan  adopted  for  raising  the  Endowment  Fund, 
to  be  at  least  $1,000,000,  arranges  for  its  distribution  into 
a  number  of  chairs,  or  Foundations,  each  bearing  a  personal 
name,  and  the  income  from  each  to  be  devoted  to  one  of  the 
specific  purposes  mentioned  in  the  “Letter  to  Hubbard” 
(setting  forth  the  need  for  the  endowment). 

Each  of  these  Foundation  sums  is  divided  into  a  number 
of  aliquot  parts,  or  shares.  The  Foundation  sum  will  ordi¬ 
narily  be  $100,000,  divided  into  not  less  than  two  nor  more 
than  twenty  aliquot  parts  or  shares  (thus  ranging  between 
$5,000  and  $50,000  each).  Those  contributors  who  are  able 
to  give  sums  of  that  amount  will  designate  the  Foundation 
to  which  they  desire  the  contribution  to  be  applied. 

The  names  to  be  selected  for  the  respective  Foundations 
will  be: 

I.  Eminent  Deceased  Teachers  in  the  School. 

II.  Eminent  Judges  and  Lawyers,  having  associa¬ 
tions  with  the  School  in  the  past. 

III.  Deceased  Graduates  or  members  of  the  School. 

IV.  Distinguished  Living  Graduates. 

V.  Donors. 

This  method  will  have  three  advantages: 


1.  It  will  worthily  perpetuate,  and  keep  in  constant 
living  memory  for  future  generations,  the  traditions  of  the 
School’s  greatness  and  the  names  of  those  who  have  helped 
to  make  it  what  it  is. 

2.  It  will  enable  many  donors,  whose  sacrifices  have  pro¬ 
vided  the  most  substantial  portions  of  the  endowment,  to 
associate  their  donations  with  individual  names  or  specific 
purposes  which  have  for  them  the  greatest  interest. 

3.  By  dividing  the  Foundations  into  shares,  it  will  en¬ 
able  the  foregoing  purposes  to  be  attained  consistently  with 
each  donor  bearing  no  greater  share  than  his  ability  permits. 
The  range  of  aliquot  parts  is  adapted  to  all  varieties  of 
amounts. 

A  tentative  distribution  of  the  several  Foundations  fol¬ 
lows;  comments  and  suggestions  are  invited  before  final  de¬ 
cision  by  the  Committee: 

I.  Foundations  in  Honor  of  Eminent  Deceased  Teachers 
in  the  School. 

1.  The  Henry  Booth  Foundation,  for 
Jurisprudence  and  Leeal  Philosophy. 

(Two  shares  of  $50,000  each) . $100,000 

2.  The  Lyman  Trumbull  Founda¬ 
tion,  for  Legislative  Research. 

(Four  shares  of  $25,000  each) .  100,000 

3.  The  Ha'rvey  B.  Hurd  Foundation, 
for  Applied  Criminal  Science. 

(Four  shares  of  $25,000  each) .  100,000 

4.  The  James  L.  High  Foundation,  for 
National  Commercial  Law. 

(Five  shares  of  $20,000  each) .  100,000 

5.  The  William  Farwell  Founda¬ 
tion,  for  a  Legal  Clinic. 

(Ten  shares  of  $10,000  each) .  100,000 

6.  The  Henry  Schofield  Founda¬ 
tion,  for  American  Constitutional  Law. 

(Two  shares  of  $50,000  each) . 


100,000 


7.  The  James  B.  Bradwell  Foun¬ 
dation,  for  the  Publication  of  Legal  Lit¬ 
erature  (Illinois  Law  Review,  and  Jour¬ 
nal  of  Criminal  Law  and  Criminology). 

(Ten  shares  of  $10,000  each) .  100,000 

8.  The  Henry  W.  Blodgett  Foun¬ 
dation,  for  International  Constitutional 
Law. 

(Ten  shares  of  $10,000  each) .  100,000 

9.  The  Charles  C.  Linthicum 
Foundation,  for  General  Law. 

(Ten  shares  of  $10,000  each) .  100,000 

10.  The  Nathan  S.  Davis  Founda¬ 
tion,  for  Applied  Criminal  Science. 

(Twenty  shares  of  $5,000  each) .  100,000 

11.  The  John  Marshall  Harlan 
Foundation,  for  General  Law. 

(Ten  shares  of  $10,000  each) .  100,000 


II.  Foundations  in  Honor  of  Eminent  Judges  and  Lawyers 
Associated  with  the  School  in  the  Past. 

1.  The  Abraham  Lincoln  Founda¬ 
tion,  for  Professional  Ethics  and  Train- 


ing. 

(Twenty  shares  of  $5,000  each) . $100,000 

2.  The  Thomas  Hoyne  Foundation, 
for  General  Law. 

(Twenty  shares  of  $5,000  each) .  100,000 

3.  The  Thomas  Drummond  Foun¬ 
dation,  for  General  Law. 

(Twenty  shares  of  $5,000  each) .  100,000 

4.  The  Wirt  Dexter  Foundation,  for 
General  Law. 

(Twenty  shares  of  $5,000  each) .  100,000 


5.  The  Oliver  Wendell  Holmes 
Foundation,  for  Legal  History. 

(Twenty  shares  of  $5,000  each) . 


100,000 


6.  The  David  Dudley  Field  Foun¬ 
dation,  for  Legislative  Research. 

(Twenty  shares  of  $5,000  each) .  100,000 

7.  The  Julius  Rosenthal  Foundation,  for 
General  Law. 

(Four  shares  of  $25,000  each) .  100,000 

III.  Foundations  in  Honor  of  Deceased  Graduates  or  Mem¬ 
bers  of  the  School. 

These  Foundations  will  be  of  not  less  than  $20,000  nor 
more  than  $50,000  each,  and  the  object  may  be  one  of  those 
above  enumerated,  or  some  other  object  specified  by  the 
donors.  Their  number  is  not  limited.  All  or  a  part  of  the 
fund  contributed  by  the  members  of  a  particular  class  may, 
at  the  members’  request,  be  thus  designated  as  a  Founda¬ 
tion  in  the  name  of  their  classmate. 

IV.  Foundations  in  Honor  of  Distinguished  Living  Grad 

uates. 

These  Foundations  will  be  of  $100,000  each.  They  may 
be  formed,  by  consent  of  the  donors,  from  the  united  con¬ 
tributions  of  classmates  or  others. 

V .  Foundations  in  the  Name  of  Donors. 

Foundations  of  not  less  than  $50,000  may  receive  the 
family  name  of  the  donor,  by  vote  of  the  Faculty,  and  may 
be  applied  to  any  of  the  above  enumerated  purposes  or  to 
a  purpose  designated  by  the  donor. 

Description  of  Names  in  the  First  Two  Groups 

In  Leaflet  4,  some  brief  notes  call  to  memory  a  few  salient 
facts  about  the  eminent  men  whose  names  have  been  tenta¬ 
tively  selected  for  the  first  two  groups  of  Foundations. 

Names  in  the  Third  and  Fourth  Groups  of  Foundations 

Suggestions  are  invited,  from  all  alumni,  of  names  suit¬ 
able  for  selection  in  the  third  and  fourth  groups.  The  names 
suggested  will  be  confidentially  communicated  to  the  re¬ 
spective  class  committees. 


Northwestern  University  Law  School 

(UNION  COLLEGE  OF  LAW) 

A  Brief  Description 

of  the  Names  selected  for  Entitling  the  several 

ENDOWMENT  FOUNDATIONS 
I.  Names  of  Eminent  Deceased  Teachers  in  the  School. 


1 .  Henry  Booth.  First  professor  of  law, 
and  first  dean  of  the  School;  Judge  of  the 
Cook  County  Circuit  Court  1871-1877.  He 
was  appointed  professor  in  1859,  and  retired 
in  1901,  emeritus,  thus  serving  more  than 
forty  years.  At  the  time  of  his  appointment 
there  were  only  three  other  law  schools  west 
of  the  Alleghanies. 


2.  Lyman  Trumbull.  Professor  of  law 
in  the  ’70s.  He  was  United  States  Senator 
from  1 855  to  1871,  and  was  one  of  those  whose 
vote  saved  President  Johnson  from  impeach¬ 
ment. 


3.  Harvey  B.  Hurd.  Professor  of  law 
from  1863  (with  a  short  interval),  until  his 
retirement  in  1902,  just  forty  years.  He  com¬ 
piled  the  Illinois  Revised  Statutes  of  1874; 
drafted  the  Torrens  Land  Transfer  Act  of 
1897,  and  was  a  pioneer  in  championing  im¬ 
proved  methods  of  treating  juvenile  offend¬ 
ers;  he  drafted  the  Juvenile  Court  Act  of 
1899,  which  has  proved  a  model  for  other  States  and  countries. 


4.  James  L.  High.  Professor  of  law  in 
the  ’70s,  and  eminent  as  counsel  in  commer¬ 
cial  cases.  His  treatise  on  Injunctions,  pub¬ 
lished  in  1873,  placed  him  in  the  front  rank 
of  American  legal  authors,  and  remained 
the  standard  authority  for  a  generation. 


5.  William  Farwell.  Professor  of  law 
from  1880  to  1892,  and  secretary  of  the 
School. 


6.  Henry  Schofield.  Professor  of  law 
from  1901  to  1918.  A  pupil  of  Professor 
James  B.  Thayer,  and  ultimately  his  equal 
as  a  master  of  the  subject,  he  stood  out,  after 
Thayer’s  death,  as  the  greatest  constitutional 
scholar  and  thinker  of  his  time. 


7.  James  B.  Bradwell.  Lecturer  in  the 
’70s;  judge  of  the  Cook  County  Court  1861- 
69;  editor  of  the  Chicago  Legal  News 
(founded  by  his  wife  Myra  Bradwell)  from 
1868  to  1907,  and  publisher  for  more  than 
thirty  years  of  the  standard  biennial  edition 
of  Hurd’s  Revised  Statutes  of  Illinois;  this 
edition  made  it  possible  for  the  Illinois  Re¬ 
vision  to  have  the  record  of  remaining  longer  without  recom¬ 
pilation  than  that  of  any  other  State  in  the  Union. 


8.  Henry  W.  Blodgett.  Dean  of  the 
School  1892-1893;  judge  of  the  United  States 
District  Court  1870  to  1905.  One  of  the  origi¬ 
nators  of  the  Chicago  &  Milwaukee  Railroad 
Company,  procuring  its  charter  in  1851  and, 
at  the  time  of  his  appointment  to  the  Federal 
Bench,  the  leading  railway  attorney  in  the 
west.  One  of  counsel  representing  the  United 
States  before  the  Board  of  Arbitrators  between  the  United 
States  and  Great  Britain  in  regard  to  the  fur  seal  interests  in 
the  Bering  Sea. 


9.  Charles  C.  Linthicum.  Graduate 
of  the  School  in  1882,  and  lecturer  on  Patent 
Law  from  1903  to  his  death  in  1916.  One  of 
the  most  eminent  practitioners  of  national 
and  international  standing.  At  the  time  of 
his  death  he  was  legal  adviser  to  the  U.  S. 
Steel  Corporation  in  patent  matters. 


10.  Nathan  S.  Davis.  Lecturer  on  Med¬ 
ical  Jurisprudence  for  nearly  thirty  years, 
till  1902.  Founder  of  the  Medical  School  of 
Northwestern  University  and  its  dean  for 
many  years. 


11.  John  Marshall  Harlan.  Lecturer 
on  constitutional  law  1889-1892;  associate 
justice  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United 
States  1 877  to  191 1. 


II.  Names  of  Eminent  Lawyers  and  Judges  Associated 
with  the  School  in  the  Past. 

1.  Abraham  Lincoln.  In  the  early 
part  of  the  first  year  of  the  School  (1859), 
■rr  4*  an  important  trial  took  place  in  the  Federal 
Court,  which  was  held  in  the  same  building 
with  the  School.  Abraham  Lincoln  being  of 
counsel,  the  lecture  hours  were  altered,  so  as 
to  permit  the  students  to  attend  the  trial. 
Through  one  of  the  students,  named  Whitney, 
who  had  formerly  ridden  the  circuit  with  Lincoln,  the  stu¬ 
dents  made  the  acquaintance  of  Lincoln,  and  sought  him  each 
morning  before  court  opened,  when  Lincoln  entertained  them 
with  his  wit,  wisdom,  and  anecdotes. 

The  site  of  the  School  for  the  past  eighteen  years  is  directly 
associated  with  the  episode  which  ultimately  led  to  Lincoln’s 
elevation  to  the  presidency.  The  old  Tremont  House,  where 
Lincoln  usually  sojourned,  was  located  on  the  southeast  cor¬ 
ner  of  Lake  and  Dearborn  Streets,  and  from  one  of  its  bal¬ 
conies  on  Lake  Street,  Lincoln  delivered,  on  July  10,  1858, 
the  epochal  speech  following  that  of  Douglas,  on  July  9, 
from  the  same  spot,  resulting  in  the  challenge  on  July  24, 
to  that  State-wide  debate  which  made  Lincoln  nation¬ 
ally  famous.  The  spot  was  exactly  identified  to  Dean  Wig- 
more,  in  1902,  by  Judge  James  Bradwell,  who  was  present 
in  1858  on  the  occasion  of  both  speeches. 

2.  Thomas  Hoyne.  In  1859  he  contrib¬ 
uted  the  sum  of  $5,000  for  the  purpose  of 
securing  a  professor  of  law  and  founding  a 
law  school;  Henry  Booth  was  the  professor 
thus  selected.  Thomas  Hoyne,  eminent  among 
early  Chicago  lawyers,  was  chairman  of  the 
Board  of  Counselors  of  the  School  1865-1873, 
and  then  president  of  the  Board  of  Trustees 
of  the  Union  College  of  Law,  until  his  death  in  1884.  His 
son  and  his  grandson  are  graduates  of  the  School. 


3.  Thomas  Drummond.  First  chairman 
of  the  Board  of  Counselors  of  the  School 
founded  by  Thomas  Hoyne,  1839-1863  ;  judge 
of  the  United  States  Circuit  Court  from  1869 
to  1884,  when  he  resigned. 


4.  Wirt  Dexter.  Member  of  the  Board 
of  Trustees  of  the  Union  College  of  Law  in 
the  ’70s.  Nephew  of  Franklin  Dexter  of 
Massachusetts,  who  was  counsel  for  the 
Knapps  in  1830,  at  their  trial  in  which  Daniel 
Webster  delivered  his  celebrated  speech  for 
the  prosecution.  Wirt  Dexter  was  the  most 
eminent  advocate  of  his  day  at  the  Chicago 
Bar,  especially  esteemed  as  counsel  for  the  defence  in  a  crimi¬ 
nal  trial.  He  was  a  partner  of  the  late  John  J.  Herrick,  '68. 


5.  Oliver  Wendell  Holmes.  Author 
of  “The  Common  Law”  (1881),  the  first 
Anglo-American  legal  history  composed  on 
modern  historical  lines.  Justice  and  Chief 
Justice  of  the  Massachusetts  Supreme  Judi¬ 
cial  Court,  and  then  Associate  Justice  of  the 
United  States  Supreme  Court.  In  1902,  at 
the  inauguration  of  the  present  quarters  of  the 
Law  School,  he  journeyed  to  Chicago  to  deliver  the  Inaugural 
Address,  on  October  20.  His  signature  bearing  that  date  is 
inscribed  on  a  tablet  in  the  Assembly  Room. 


6.  David  Dudley  Field.  At  the  found¬ 
ing  of  the  School,  in  1859,  David  Dudley 
Field  came  West  from  New  York,  on  the 
invitation  of  Mr.  Hoyne,  to  deliver  the  In¬ 
augural  Address.  Field  was  already  a  recog¬ 
nized  leader  of  the  bar,  and  his  champion¬ 
ship  of  legislative  codification  as  the  panacea 
for  common  law  conditions  had  given  him  a 
national  reputation,  which  later  became  international.  Field’s 
knowledge  of  the  West  had  enabled  him  to  form  positive 
political  convictions  in  favor  of  Abraham  Lincoln;  and  in 
next  year’s  Republican  Convention  in  1860,  Field  received 
the  greatest  share  of  credit  for  the  nomination  of  Lincoln. 


7.  Julius  Rosenthal.  The  most  learned 
man  of  his  time  at  the  Chicago  Bar.  Con¬ 
nected  in  various  official  capacities  with  the 
Chicago  Law  Institute  from  1866  to  1905; 
for  almost  forty  years  of  this  period  its  Libra¬ 
rian;  a  constant  friend  of  the  School  in  en¬ 
larging  the  opportunities  for  legal  research 
in  the  two  libraries.  Upon  his  death  in  1905, 
a  valuable  portion  of  his  library,  consisting  mostly  of  foreign 
books,  was  presented  by  his  family  to  the  Albert  H.  Gary 
Librarv  of  Law. 


THE  LIBRARY  OF  THE 

MAR  1 0 1939 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 


